The IRS controversy is quickly unraveling. (1 Viewer)

[Rayderr]

4 conservative groups were approved in 2010 and 2011 combined. 22 liberal groups were approved in that same time frame. a 6:1 ratio is not good. I don't believe that this is the result of Obama ordering it, but rather just some mid-management types behaving inappropriately. But to stick your head in the sand like you are doing is just utterly ridiculous.

But that isn't a big scandal. That is people being stupid. As I said at the outset if the intention were to specifically target Tea Party people then by all means punish those that did it. But stop acting like it's ####### Watergate because it isn't. It's the same stupid crap that happens in every big institution in the world. So the GOP can look like idiots and continue to seem like the boy who cried wolf or they can move on.

I think a part of the gov't intentionally targetting a segment of the population (whether it be political beliefs, religious beliefs, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) is a big deal. As mentioned previously, I do not think Obama, or anyone in the White House is responsible. But I do believe it is in the interest of the American Public to fully investigate it, punish those that are responsible, and determine what needs to be done so it can't be happen again. And you constantly coming into these threads and saying "A LIBERAL GROUP GOT DENIED!!! SEE?!?!?! MOVE ALONG!!!!" makes you look like a political hack who is more interested in downplaying it just in case it does end up being a bigger scandal. This is a big deal. It doesn't need Obama to be involved to be a big deal and it being a big deal does not mean Obama is worst than Nixon.

No my point in mentioning who actually suffered is to make it clear that it wasn't only Tea Party groups that got targeted. Ignoring that is what makes this look like hackery because it ignores the reality that Tea Party groups weren't the only ones targeted. Have I mentioned that Tea Party types weren't the only ones targeted? Because you'd have a hard time knowing that reading what is written here and other places about it. And I am not the one who goes on TV and screams about impeaching Obama over it, repealing the ACA over it and how it's bigger than Watergate. That would be the illustrious GOP, speaking of hacks.

Just because liberal groups were investigated doesn't mean they were targeted. Surely you understand that distinction.

The liberal groups were the only ones to get the boot, if the there were another group "targeted" surely they would have something to point to?

Not that I am asking you guys to stop, I'm always a big fan of the latest conservative efforts to make fools of themselves.

First off... one group got denied. One. And to say that is evidence that there was no targeting is ridiculous. If there's a TSA memo saying put all people of Middle Eastern descent through the full body scanners, but they also put a couple white guys through, does that mean there wasn't targeting of people of M.E. descent? If a police chief implemented a policy to pull over all black drivers, but a couple white drivers got pulled over as well, does that mean that black people weren't being targeted?

 

[timschochet]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?

Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?

I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

 

[Rayderr]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way.

2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

Your second question has been answered a million times.

The answer to the first question at this point is that we don't know yet. They're still combing through all the emails and files to try to find out. The reality is that it's possible that it could have been but we'll never find out anyway. Lerner or someone else could have had political motivations, enacted the policy to politically target conservative groups but never admitted it anywhere.

 

[timschochet]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

 

[Rayderr]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

How can "Let's target every tea party related group" not be politically motivated? Utter stupidity? That's not exactly a comforting thought.

 

[Toad_1234]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

Naive people like Tim are why Jay Carney lies every chance he gets telling 5 different versions of the story. The press corp sits there rolling their eyes at all of the intelligence insulting, always changing narratives and Tim needs to see more evidence.

 

[timschochet]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

How can "Let's target every tea party related group" not be politically motivated? Utter stupidity? That's not exactly a comforting thought.

Well, utter stupidity does explain a lot of what the government does, actually. It is far easier for me to believe in utter stupidity than in deliberate malevolence (a point I have made over and over again.)

But in this case there are, IMO, 3 good reasons to suspect that this was NOT deliberate:

1. The fact that liberal groups were included. I know you guys keep trying to dismiss that as irrelevant, but it's not irrelevant to me.

2. The fact that these investigations were run by a conservative Republican.

3. The fact that, according to several experts, the new campaign finance rules affect these sort of groups which sprung up after Obama's election in 2008, providing a plausible, non-partisan reason for the IRS investigation.

None of those 3 points are conclusive of course. But put together, they are in my mind conclusive ENOUGH to suggest that if we're going to assume these investigations were politically motivated, we had better have concrete proof to do so. Supposition is not enough. So far the concrete proof is not there, and until it is, I don't regard this as much of a story.

 

[Rayderr]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated?Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House?I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

How can "Let's target every tea party related group" not be politically motivated? Utter stupidity? That's not exactly a comforting thought.

Well, utter stupidity does explain a lot of what the government does, actually. It is far easier for me to believe in utter stupidity than in deliberate malevolence (a point I have made over and over again.)

But in this case there are, IMO, 3 good reasons to suspect that this was NOT deliberate:

1. The fact that liberal groups were included. I know you guys keep trying to dismiss that as irrelevant, but it's not irrelevant to me.

2. The fact that these investigations were run by a conservative Republican.

3. The fact that, according to several experts, the new campaign finance rules affect these sort of groups which sprung up after Obama's election in 2008, providing a plausible, non-partisan reason for the IRS investigation.

None of those 3 points are conclusive of course. But put together, they are in my mind conclusive ENOUGH to suggest that if we're going to assume these investigations were politically motivated, we had better have concrete proof to do so. Supposition is not enough. So far the concrete proof is not there, and until it is, I don't regard this as much of a story.

They really weren't. They may have gotten caught up because of some broader points, but there was nothing that specifically targeted liberal groups like the conservative groups were.

 

[Rayderr]

CNN Poll: Did White House order IRS targeting?

Posted by
CNN Political UnitWashington (CNN) – A growing number of Americans believe that senior White House officials ordered the Internal Revenue Service to target conservative political groups, according to a new national poll.

And a CNN/ORC International survey released Tuesday morning also indicates that a majority of the public says the controversy, which involves increased IRS scrutiny of tea party and other conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, is very important to the nation.

Republicans argue that the Obama administration used the IRS to intimidate and harass political opponents. Democrats say poor management at the tax agency, rather than political bias, is to blame. Congressional sources on both sides say that interviews with IRS workers so far have found no political conspiracy.

Last month only 37% of the public thought that the IRS controversy led to the White House, with 55% saying that agency officials acted on their own without direct orders from Washington. Now the number who say the White House directed that IRS program has increased 10 points, to 47%, virtually the same as the 49% who believe the IRS agents acted on their own.

"Younger Americans are much less likely than older Americans to believe in White House involvement, and there is, not surprisingly, a partisan divide as well," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "But the Obama administration may be losing independents on this matter. In May, only 36% felt the White House ordered the IRS to target conservative groups; now that number has crossed the 50% threshold."

Fifty-one percent of those questioned said the IRS controversy is a very important issue to the nation, compared to 55% who felt that way in May. In the past week and a half, the IRS story has been put a bit on the backburner, as the controversy over the federal government's massive surveillance program has dominated the spotlight.

The poll was conducted for CNN by ORC International June 11-13, with 1,014 adults nationwide questioned by telephone. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points.

 

[Sand]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated? Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House? I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

How can "Let's target every tea party related group" not be politically motivated? Utter stupidity? That's not exactly a comforting thought.

Well, utter stupidity does explain a lot of what the government does, actually. It is far easier for me to believe in utter stupidity than in deliberate malevolence (a point I have made over and over again.)

But in this case there are, IMO, 3 good reasons to suspect that this was NOT deliberate:

1. The fact that liberal groups were included. I know you guys keep trying to dismiss that as irrelevant, but it's not irrelevant to me.

2. The fact that these investigations were run by a conservative Republican.

3. The fact that, according to several experts, the new campaign finance rules affect these sort of groups which sprung up after Obama's election in 2008, providing a plausible, non-partisan reason for the IRS investigation.

None of those 3 points are conclusive of course. But put together, they are in my mind conclusive ENOUGH to suggest that if we're going to assume these investigations were politically motivated, we had better have concrete proof to do so. Supposition is not enough. So far the concrete proof is not there, and until it is, I don't regard this as much of a story.

Huh. Turns out this is a lie. Zero progressive groups were given the same flogging that conservative groups did.

So now we're back to the IRS being used as the strong arm of the Democrat party.

 

[Jayrod]

I had applied for a non-profit for an entity named that included in the name "Strong Families" and made no bones about it being a religiously affiliated organization. It took 14 months to get approved. Sat "in line" for 9 months and then took 5 months to finalize with a couple of requests for information that had already been received.

Once we heard about the targeting of conservative groups, we definitely felt that we were included in that group. The delays just seemed unnecessary....but then again it was the federal government so we just thought it was another sign of government ineptitude.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Is there any evidence that the targeting was politically motivated? Is there any evidence that this was orchestrated by the White House? I keep asking these same two questions over and over, and not a single person who believes this is a huge scandal has answered them.

1. I really don't see how it can't be politically motivated in some way. 2. I do not believe that the WH is involved, but I do believe it to be a big issue. Surely Tim, you do not believe the gov't should target people based solely on beliefs.

I don't. But your statement "I really don't see how it can't" is not evidence. Because I DO see how it can't. So I need to see evidence.

How can "Let's target every tea party related group" not be politically motivated? Utter stupidity? That's not exactly a comforting thought.

Well, utter stupidity does explain a lot of what the government does, actually. It is far easier for me to believe in utter stupidity than in deliberate malevolence (a point I have made over and over again.)

But in this case there are, IMO, 3 good reasons to suspect that this was NOT deliberate:

1. The fact that liberal groups were included. I know you guys keep trying to dismiss that as irrelevant, but it's not irrelevant to me.

2. The fact that these investigations were run by a conservative Republican.

3. The fact that, according to several experts, the new campaign finance rules affect these sort of groups which sprung up after Obama's election in 2008, providing a plausible, non-partisan reason for the IRS investigation.

None of those 3 points are conclusive of course. But put together, they are in my mind conclusive ENOUGH to suggest that if we're going to assume these investigations were politically motivated, we had better have concrete proof to do so. Supposition is not enough. So far the concrete proof is not there, and until it is, I don't regard this as much of a story.

Update?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Guys, tim is busy hijacking 4-5 other threads and probably has a couple of soul-destroying drafts running right now. You have to give him more than a couple of hours to respond to your bump.